Kiepersol Poultry Farm v Pasiya (LCC36/06) [2007] ZALCC 11 (30 July 2007)

Kiepersol Poultry Farm v Pasiya (LCC36/06) [2007] ZALCC 11 (30 July 2007)

The court found that the applicant failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that Sam Pasiya had permanently and voluntarily abandoned occupation of the homestead. The evidence showed that Sam Pasiya retained his furniture and personal effects at the farm, maintained regular contact, and did not intend to relinquish his status as occupier. The respondent was not an occupier in his own right but a dependant of his father. Consequently, the application for eviction under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act could not be sustained.

Citation
[2007] ZALCC 11
Parties
Applicant: Kiepersol Poultry Farm; Respondent: Gideon Pasiya
Court
Land Claims Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 July 2007
Case Number
LCC36/06
Procedural Posture
Eviction Application / Trial on Special Defence
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Judges
F C Bam
Legal Topics
Extension of Security of Tenure Act, Status of Occupier, Dependant Rights, Termination of Residence
Land and Property Extension of Security of Tenure Act Status of Occupier Dependant Rights Termination of Residence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kiepersol Poultry Farm

Applicant

Gideon Pasiya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Eviction Application / Trial on Special Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent is an occupier in his own right or merely a dependant under his father, Sam Pasiya.
  2. 2 Whether Sam Pasiya permanently and voluntarily abandoned occupation of the homestead on the farm.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to an eviction order under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that Sam Pasiya had permanently and voluntarily abandoned occupation of the homestead. The evidence showed that Sam Pasiya retained his furniture and personal effects at the farm, maintained regular contact, and did not intend to relinquish his status as occupier. The respondent was not an occupier in his own right but a dependant of his father. Consequently, the application for eviction under the Extension of Security of Tenure Act could not be sustained.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with no order as to costs.